18 
BULLETIN 1086, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
Table 3. — Pumping record of pickle-cured hams — Continued. 
Combined Results of Fort Worth and East St. Lons Pumping Records on Pickle-Cured Hams . 
C f S d Pumped «^ by pumping. 
Pounds. 
Oily: 
Fort Worth. 
St. Louis 
Soft: 
Fort Worth. 
St. Louis 
Firm: 
Fort Worth. 
St. Louis 
2,094 
2,390 
2,245 
2,505 
151 
115 
7.21 
4.81 
4,484 
4,750 
266 
5.93 
2,084 
605 ! 
2,223 
629 
139 
24 
6.67 
3.97 
2,689 
2,852 
163 
6.06 
2,074 
2,437 
2,202 
2,541 
128 
104 
6.17 
4.27 
4,511 
4, 743 
232 
5.14 
The hams, after being trimmed and classified, were pumped with a curing solution 
that caused them to increase considerably in weight. This gain is usually uniform, 
but with some of the tests a variation was noted. In the Fort Worth tests this gain 
varied from 4.67 per cent to 7.99 per cent and at St. Louis from 3.52 to 5.94 per cent. 
It was noted that none of the meat in the St. Louis test gained as much by pumping 
as did the meat at Fort Worth. This was probably due to a difference in methods of 
the two packing plants. The combined total percentage ga^n at Fort Worth and East 
St. Louis was oily, 5.93; soft, 6.06; firm, 5.14. 
Table 4. — Curing records of pickle-cured hams. 
Fort Worth. 
Lot 
No. 
Weight 
in cure 
(pounds). 
Number 
of days 
in cure. 
Hours 
meat 
drained. 
Net 
weight of 
drained 
meat 
(pounds). 
Gain from chilled 
weight through 
cure. 
Pounds. 
Per cent. 
Oily 
1 
4 
7 
10 
2 
5 
8 
11 
3 
6 
9 
12 
642 
582 
487 
534 
61 
59 
61 
59 
16 
16 
14* 
14* 
641 
585 
493 
530 
40 
35 
45 
35 
6.66 
6.36 
10.04 
7.07 
2,245 
2,249 
155 
7.40 
Soft. 
586 
538 
527 
572 
61 
59 
61 
59 
16 
16 
14* 
14* 
596 
542 
530 
579 
49 i 8.96 
28 5.45 
42 8.61 
44 8.22 
2,223 
2,247 
163 7.82 
575 
553 
530 
544 
61 
59 
61 
59 
16 
16 
14* 
14* 
589 
562 
542 
549 
45 
35 
50 
38 
S.27 
6.64 
10.16 
7.44 
2,202 
2,242 
168 
8.10 
